Wow, lot's of responses! I'm gonna answer as many as I can.
I didn't say that a fetish was the only motivation. But someone who gets a 'kick" out of dressing would probably keep dressing regardless of philosophical objections.Originally Posted by Violetgray
For me, admiration of women is what made me want to experience life on their side of the aisle (same reason I've slept in the mud in a Civil War uniform, to connect to someone else's life experiences). But as time passes, I look at other CDs and MYSELF (note, just as much criticism was leveled at my own person), and I can't help but think, "wait a minute, I don't think this is what I admired in the first place."
Pretty much all great advances in human history were made by someone overthinking something. ;-) Also, while they may be "buzzwords", they make the point. Sure I could follow college English arguments class and use non-cliched synonyms, but what is the point? Y'all are an intelligent crowd and you'd still know what I was alluding to. Sometimes its better just to call a spade a spade.
Besides the fact that "humanism" as a term was already taken, "feminism" became an accurate moniker because it was a one-sided struggle. Men were severely oppressing women. Even men who "loved" their wives refused to relinquish their status as privileged males. Women could not vote, own property or even earn wages when they did work (all money a woman made in the early 1800s was paid to her husband). "Feminism" was exactly what the name implies, a women's movement against male tyranny. Feminists had no more reason to incorporate men into the title of their movement than the American colonists had to incorporate Britain into their Revolution (as Britain was the enemy). Yes, there were men allied with the feminist cause, but they were acting outside the parameters of Victorian manhood. Most men, even sensitive men, were indifferent.
When Abigail Addams expressed feminist thoughts in her letters to John, he either dismissed them or mocked her saying that he "could only but laugh" at her ideas, which would lead to "the despotism of the petticoat." And this was from a man who was rather sensitive and progressive for his day ... most men of the 18th century wouldn't have even had such a discussion with their wife.
At one of the first feminist meetings, the Seneca Falls Convention of 1848, Elizabeth Cady Stanton used a modified version of the US Declaration of Independence to declare the intentions of their burgeoning movement.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women are created equal." (Note, no female supremacy was ever stated.) "Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of those who suffer from it to refuse allegiance to it, and to insist upon the institution of a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness." (Notice the implied secession, feminists were seceding from established society the same way America seceded from the British Empire). The "humanism" of their day was in error, hence the need for a "feminist" separation.
To date, not all of the problems addressed at the 1848 Convention have been fully addressed, hence the continuing need for a separate "feminist" identity. Reunification of humanity can't really occur until men no longer have innate privilege over women. Until society doesn't use ****-shaming and "purity" to force girls into marriage. Until wages are fair and equal in all work sectors. Until the media stops objectifying women and promoting anorexic images of models almost too skinny to exist in real life. Until people recognize that girls can be just as successful in math and science. Until pigs fly. (In other words, women will always have specific challenges and need a unique philosophy tailored to meeting those challenges, something that "humanism" is too broad to address).
Sorry for the college textbook. Just trying to answer your question about why "feminism" is not lumped under the umbrella of "humanism." (Oh, and I may have gotten some names, quotes and dates wrong. Bite me, I'm not Googling this crap at 3:00 in the morning. If you're THAT interested, Google it yourself).
A lot of stereotypes about feminism linger long after their original meaning is lost. The idea of lingerie as a "torture device" stems from the turn of the century, where they literally WERE torturous. Corsets, for example, deformed womens' bones and restricted their breathing. And even nowadays, high heels can be very painful and physically damaging. Sure CDs might love to wear them for fun now and then, but most of us have never had to wear the damned things for 40 hours a week. And as for hosiery, God knows I'd be crazy if I had to wear the fragile things all the time. Keep in mind that as recently as the 1960s, such clothes were MANDATORY for women. Now it's an option, and modern feminists don't have a defined opinion on the subject. A girl can wear what she wants without some fictional Feminist SWAT team swooping down on her.
The "bra-burning" feminist is a ludicrous urban legend, and it's sad just how much people continue to believe in it. A single bra was burned in a trash can filled with various other feminine articles and burned (not the bra specifically, but the whole can). This spread into the media and spawned the myth of the Bra-Burner, a term that talk radio pundits would get endless mileage out of. But the "public bra-burning ceremony" that so many Conservatives believe in simply never happened. NOT ONCE. EVER.
Now it IS true that some feminists denounced bras. But understand that they were denouncing the fact that bras were mandatory. Not all women found them comfortable, but not wearing one got you a nasty social label. Such "uniform" regulations in society are wrong. Some feminists chose not to wear a bra to protest this bias, but only a few. Feminism had already existed in its modern form for over a hundred years, so going "braless" was hardly a major part of the movement. But when the media wanted to slander feminism, "bra-burning" was sure to generate shock and attention.
Exactly. Also, CDs are only experiencing a few small parts of a woman's life experience, and not even the most defining parts. This leads to some bone-headed statements by CDs. For example, I often hear "why don't GGs want to wear heels/stockings/corsets/bunny suits/whipped cream/ect. all the time?!"
Since a CD can simply change back to his normal self on a whim, he is going to get a much rosier view of womanhood than a real woman would have. To elaborate on my Civil War comparison, I know a little bit of what a soldier back then experienced. I've ground coffee beans with a rifle butt, chewed on hardtack bread, slept on the ground, marched in full wool uniform, fired period muskets, made ammunition and many other reenacting activities. In some very mundane ways, I know what it felt like to be a Civil War soldier.
But I'll never know what it's like to march towards a line of over a thousand armed enemy soldiers across an open field with no cover, pissing my pants because I'm so damned scared, watching my buddies next to me getting their guts blown out, to be wounded/maimed, or to look into the eyes of some poor boy who doesn't look much different from me but I have to kill him because he's wearing the other side's uniform. Do you see where I am going with this? It takes more than some clothes and roleplay to understand another person's life and struggle.
This is why I get frustrated when CDs say stuff like, "I feel so much like a woman when I dress." No, you don't. A man can't ever quite feel like a GG anymore than a re-enactor can feel like a soldier. Mostly because CDs have a "off switch" and GGs don't.
TG people are an exception, of course. They're in a different bracket, as they have decided to take on the mantle of femininity full time. But even then, a TG and a GG still have different struggles. A TG will never have to deal with menstruation or pregnancy. A GG will never have to have excruciating genital surgery, or deal with transphobia on top of sexism.
Also, I didn't mean to bash all drag queens and such performances. I just got a bad vibe from one I saw at a local club. I get bad vibes from beauty pageants, but I don't dislike all GGs as a result.
I don't know where I am with dressing right now. I do know that from now on, any dressing I do will be more dignified than my previous outings. I don't think I can do ****ty looks anymore in good conscience.
You need a microscope for that minority.
